The one and done rule does not destroy potential in players at all, in fact it does the opposite. It prepares players for the NBA, simply skipping college basketball and going straight to pro would be like going from elementary school to highschool, you need the middle man to prepare you, in this case, for fast paced games.

"simply skipping college basketball and going straight to pro would be like going from elementary school to highschool"

No one is forcing these players to jump from high school to NBA. If the player feels he is good enough to play he should have the right to enter the draft. Most players are probably smart enough to know whe

you need the middle man to prepare you, in this case, for fast paced games.

If this were true, then how come we had players like Lebron James, Kobe Bryant and Tracy Mcgrady who entered the NBA and have had successful careers.

Many players have been opposed to this

"Kansas State freshman Bill Walker, said (as a junior in high school), "I'm against it. I don't see why you have to be 19 to play a game of basketball when you can be 18 and go to war for our country and die. It's ridiculous."

Jerryd Bayless said "It's not fair at all. If a tennis player can go pro at 13, I don't understand why a basketball player can't go pro at 18."

To sum up, I think its an unnecessary rule that does more harm than good.

First off, I would like to inform my opponent that Wikipedia is in fact, not, a dependable resource. Simply because anyone can edit their pages.

The opponent brings up a few successful players who skipped playing college ball and went straight to pro but truthfully there is only a select few who were able to be successful in that transition, have you ever heard of Eddy Curry, Kwame Brown, Gerald Green, or Sebastian Telfair? They are only four of the numerous who fail at the transition from highschool to pro basketball. This rule was put into effect to make sure the playing quality stays high for those who watch NBA, no one wants to watch a poor quality game.

Another claim in my opponents argument is that in other sports you can become pro sooner. In the NFL there is a rule that states you must have completed 2 years of college before entering pros, and it's great. It keeps competition fair and hard. It also gives pro teams longer to monitor the athletes and see their strengths and/or weaknesses. Another reason that becoming pro in other sports is a shorter process is because they are not as popular as the NBA or NFL and they have more room for the newcoming.

Having players complete one year of college is not only beneficial for colleges but also for players, the higher-skilled players often get full scholarships and are taking classes for free. If something were to happen to the player, such as an injury, that does not allow the athlete to play then the scholar has a degree to fall back on.

The one and done rule does not force the athlete to attend college for four years and after one year the player has a choice on whether they would like to wait longer before entering the draft or not.

The opponent brings up a few successful players who skipped playing college ball and went straight to pro but truthfully there is only a select few who were able to be successful in that transition, have you ever heard of Eddy Curry, Kwame Brown, Gerald Green, or Sebastian Telfair? They are only four of the numerous who fail at the transition from highschool to pro basketball. This rule was put into effect to make sure the playing quality stays high for those who watch NBA, no one wants to watch a poor quality game.

Out of the 4 players you listed, only one of them were a true bust, and that is Kwame Brown. Gerald Green was the winner of the 2007 Slam Dunk contest, and is currently having one of his best seasons in Phoenix. Eddy Curry may not be playing now, but he averaged 19.5 points in the 2006-2007 season. Sebastian Telfair may not have had good careers like the other two, but he is nowhere near what I would call a bust.

Out of the 40 players who got drafted, only 9 players became busts. 22 players were decent to good players, and the 7 are argubably, are the best players the NBA has ever had. So this proves Pro's argument wrong. There also have been college busts also. Does that mean we should ban college players also?

Another claim in my opponents argument is that in other sports you can become pro sooner

Not once did I mention anything about other sports. Pro just made up a rebuttal for something that I never said.

If something were to happen to the player, such as an injury, that does not allow the athlete to play then the scholar has a degree to fall back on.

Again, this is a matter of choice, a player should be old enough to know the consequences. Its quite ridiculous that players should lose their liberties of entering something.

I am aware of the rule (big fan), I just want clarification that Pro understands the rule.
The NCAA has NO rules in place about an athlete turning Pro.
the NBA HAS a rule stating any prospective athletes must turn 19 during the year of the draft.

College is not a requirement. (i.e Brandon Jennings went to play in Europe for a year.. Giannis Antentoukounpo played in Greece)